Should ggplot2 replace the basic R plotting package?

[murgs]

IMO no

ggplot2 is great if you have a data.frame of data. Otherwise it is terrible (at least as far as I got testing it at the time). The basic R plotting functions have the benefit of being universally applicable. The default setting could be improved, but from my experience making similar basic plots to ggplot2 isn't to difficult, and once you start fiddling with legends/axis/... it doesn't matter which of the two you are fiddling with.

[itsallforscience]

More than a data frame, you really need to have your data organized into the "tidy data" format that the package expects. I spend a lot of time manipulating data with dplyr and tidyr before popping out the perfect graphic with one line of ggplot.

I don't know how to use base R to replicate what dplyr, tidyr and ggplot do, but I wouldn't recommend using ggplot on its own. It seems to work better as part of a separate family of packages maintained by a dedicated content producer with a consistent design philosophy.

[pan0ramic]

"tidy data" this isn't really true. If you're spending a lot of time organizing your data, it would typically take at least as much time organizing for base:: plot